The first computer

[Marin85]

OK, here we go. There are various opinions which one was the first. There are various opinions what is actually a computer. Is a non-programmable computer a computer etc etc...

So, what do you, committed ThinkPadders, think on this matter?

[killer]

As I have posted elsewhere ...

Colossus was the first programmable electronic computer. In other words it was the first one that was useable for any useful purpose.

To put it another way, someone could say they invented the steam engine because they boiled a kettle to make tea ... but that was not an engine, merely a kettle.

A computer must be able to do repetitive tasks in order to save human effort and not just 'make one or two cups of tea'.

Colossus did that in spades and at least 10 were produced in order to decode encrypted messages.

[killer]

Marin,

In answer to your actual question the first computer was Charles Babbage's difference engine. It didn't really work so it probably doesn't count. The US government used a machine for counting votes (Edit: I've just remembered it was for a census not an election.) That was mechanical but worked. Maybe that was the first computer?

The first electronic, programmable computer was Colossus.

[ajkula66]

I voted for ThinkPad...

Everything else was a mere foreplay...

[Marin85]

Charles Babbage didn´t complete his difference engine, but he directed the construction of other similar devices. AFAIK, parts of those projects were successful. So, I think that counts too. I also added G. Leibniz´stepped reckoner being the first (mechanical) calculator (=computer?) as it anticipated some of the principles of a Turing machine. However, I don´t believe the step reckoner would fit in any modern scientific definition of a computer. Others may be of a different opinion though

EDIT: PLEASE CHECK YOUR VOTES AGAIN AS THEY DISAPPEARED AFTER I ADDED THE OTHER 2 OPTIONS. THANKS!

[Marin85]

Colossus was the first programmable electronic computer. In other words it was the first one that was useable for any useful purpose.

Agreed. Good point!

[dsvochak]

Without debating issues like special purpose versus general purpose, analog versus digital, working versus conceptual, I have to agree with killer. Colossus for the reasons he cited.

The patent dispute mentioned in the WWII thread (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honeywell_v._Sperry_Rand ) didn’t really decide ABC was the “first computer”. The finding was “Eckert and Mauchly did not themselves invent the automatic electronic computer, but instead derived that subject matter from one Dr. John Vincent Atanasoff.” Atanasoff or Turing may have been the "fathers of the computer" but their contributions are somewhat different than having built the first working computer.

[killer]

I voted for ThinkPad...

Everything else was a mere foreplay...

That's a brilliant posting!

[mattbiernat]

in 98 i bought a desktop e-machine. it was an amazing machine that lasted me for 8 years.

[jdhurst]

I voted for ThinkPad...

Everything else was a mere foreplay...

Vast quantities of useful computing work was done before there ever was a personal computer of any kind let alone a Thinkpad.

Even today, something like a true 64-bit AS/400 computer remains an outstanding computer. But lots preceeded it as well. .. JDH

[Temetka]

The abacus.

It reduces a ton of calculations to mere seconds.

Something which had not been done before.

[bill bolton]

The abacus.

Not programable, so not a "computer " of any sort.

Cheers,

Bill

[Temetka]

OK, here we go. There are various opinions which one was the first. There are various opinions what is actually a computer. Is a non-programmable computer a computer etc etc...

So, what do you, committed ThinkPadders, think on this matter?

The abacus.

It reduces a ton of calculations to mere seconds.

Something which had not been done before.

Not programable, so not a "computer " of any sort.

Cheers,

Bill

Programmable, meaning requiring electricity to store and recall information?

Or programmable meaning to store and recall information?

What we lack is a basic definition of the poll itself.

I posit that the abacus is programmable, just not requiring electrons to store and recall information.

[Marin85]

What we lack is a basic definition of the poll itself.

Yes, the basic intention was to make the topic sound "weak", loose, open, so it can be a poll, not a multiple-choice test (considering the type of the poll question) , and invites the participants to actually post their opinions (that may be based on historical facts, scientific definitions, their own views a.s.). And someone may even come to mention 50'-80'... IBM 370, DEC, VAX, VMS, PL, anyone?

[bill bolton]

I posit that the abacus is programmable

An abacus is not progammable (that is, able to act autonomously on stored instructions), in any way whatsoever.

Whether you apply the traditional (person) or modern (machine) definition of the term "computer", and abacus does not satisfy the criteria.

It is a very simple non-automated, codified information store, but nothing else.

Cheers,

Bill B.

[Temetka]

An abacus is not progammable (that is, able to act autonomously on stored instructions), in any way whatsoever.

Whether you apply the traditional (person) or modern (machine) definition of the term "computer", and abacus does not satisfy the criteria.

In that we agree.

I hereby, redact my entry of the Abacus and will substitute Mr. Babbage instead.

Unless we bring organics into the equation, then I might be tempted to posit that a single celled organism meets the criteria of computer by having the nucleus as the CPU and the rest of the cell able to act upon the instruction(s) found within DNA and interpreted into action by the nucleus and the rest of the cellular body.

[Robbyrobot]

Other (please elaborate) allows no elaboration.

Mine was an Atari ST.

[Marin85]

Other (please elaborate) allows no elaboration.

What do you mean (or should I ask please elaborate)?

[killer]

Marin85, The way it looks to me is this: there is a poll option of 'Other (please elaborate)' but this in itself allows no elaboration. However, by making a post to explain, Robbyrobot has elaborated. So nothing more is needed.

[Marin85]

Marin85, The way it looks to me is this: there is a poll option of 'Other (please elaborate)' but this in itself allows no elaboration. However, by making a post to explain, Robbyrobot has elaborated. So nothing more is needed.

OK, I understand now, I didn´t expect people to be so picky about the exact formulation